Dear Soyuz Presumably you have realized by now that what you have said cannot be comprehended by the intended audience. Those with a very focused vision have the advantage of being focused, and disadvantage of missing the broader picture. So it cuts both ways.
Dear Zico, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd like to point out a few things from your mail > Google is Open Source. And at least they are helping Open Source world. > If I may ask, which part of Google is open source? I haven't found the code for google desktop source anywhere -- even by searching with google or in freshmeat or sourceforge. I haven't heard google shares / ever shared the technology behind its backend database management or the scripts that runs the entire google. So, just a bunch of summer code makes it Open Source? > Google`s items is upgradeable. And it`s much stable than any stuff of M$. > Who can blame google`s search engine, calendar, book search and so on? > Appearently you had never been a beta tester for google, and therefore have no idea that even these failed to work at some point in time. I'm sure if you used Windows, you would have preferred Windows 98 over ME, and 2000 over XP and definitely XP over Vista -- since they are comperatively more stable than the other. The idea of stability is different when you are comparing between a desktop application, or a web based application, or an entire OS. you do not compare the lettuce in the salad with the fish in that curry, do you? They are both different. Likewise, the scope of stability and performance is entirely different between the two. You can argue that M$ products are more susceptible to viruses and internet attacks. But if you remove that part entirely, I doubt how much unstability you will find even in their Exchange server. > Differences has been given.... > Actually, no, you have not given any differences, you merely stated your opinion which does not indicate any difference. Let me put it a bit more bluntly. I am merely summerizing what Sayuz has said, and then you tell me the difference a. Google is encouraging Open Source by arranging competitions, supporting projects, etc. Microsoft is encouraging Open Source by donating money. b. Google is making money by giving away Free Software that displays advertisements and brings *them* money; Microsoft is making money by selling the software that does not show any advertisements. (well, in the long run, google is making more money than M$ in that way, since that is a recurring income) > Again... i don`t care about money, share and other stuff. I only care about > Open Source philosophy and rule and also care about a *stable* program. > Now I'm stuck. I have seen so many different philosophy of Open Source! would you like to share your vision of Open Source with me (off list) please? Also, do you have any statistics on the percentage of Stable Open Source programmes as opposed to non-stables? > > They need to get rid off *Windows* at least. Cause, it`s really a garbage. I'm quite certain you don't know the history of Windows -- how it came to being. If you did, you would have never thought Billy boy is going to get rid of it. Specially since he has salvaged it from IBM, gave it a new look and marketed as Windows. The easiest thing for him to would be to give it a new piece of suit, and sell it with a new name. That's billy boy. You might hate windows and billy as much as you like, but that will very unlikely change the present scenerio. You might decide to remain blind, but the open source community cannot afford that Luxury. Happy linuxing -- Linux is for the ones who hate windows BSD is for the ones who Love Unix. http://www.leovilletownsquare.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/19190/
